New sail for Tystie

  • 24 Dec 2012 01:34
    Reply # 1166017 on 833895
    Deleted user
    David,
    Upon further perusal of this thread and its associated photo album I see reference to the sail being "hauled forward" for running.  Do you actually have running lines to haul it forward, or would this be done by easing the luff and throat hauling parrels and letting the sail swing forward under its own weight?
    Beautiful though this sail is, it does appear to have additional running rigging as compared to an HM sail.  Is this accurate?  Of course, the cambered HM sail relies on HK parrels to keep the panels smooth, which, while not running rigging, are certainly additional rigging.
    Think, think, ponder, ponder... dither dither... <sigh>
  • 21 Dec 2012 00:08
    Reply # 1164333 on 889467
    Deleted user
    Paul Thompson wrote:
    David Tyler wrote:Jeff suffered, Lesley suffered ... and then it was my turn. Getting out a mast that's been stuck in with Spartite, that is. ........

    And Spartite is on my list of Things I Will Never Do Again.

    Correct me if I am wrong, but what is common for all three cases (that is apart from the Spartite). I believe that none of you had a reverse taper on either the mast or the partner/step. One of them has to have a reverse taper or you will suffer.  You also must, absolutely must throughly  grease the side that contacts the reverse taper. If the above is done, the mast usually comes out without to much trouble.

    If both sides have a taper, the reverse taper must be quite a bit more that the taper on the other side. Else it will still jam.



    Very late and out of date, but I had to comment - Seablossom's original mast did indeed have a reverse taper.  I assume the PO did not grease the taper before putting in the mast / Spartite.
    I did so much damage to my mast in my attempt to extract it that in the long run I chickened out on trying to use it again, and bought an aluminum extrusion for about $2300.00 US to replace it.
  • 15 Aug 2012 21:17
    Reply # 1048042 on 833895
    Gary King wrote:Well done David. How does passage making with the single fanned rig compare with the old 2 masted rig?
    It's a bit like comparing apples with oranges, Gary  - I changed from two mast wingsail rig to one mast junk rig. 
    But I can say that with one sail, handling is simpler, but harder physical work, as you'd expect. 
    My single sail is right at the maximum manageable sail area, and the loads on all the lines are high. Running downwind is simpler - no decisions to make as to whether to goosewing, or whether to haul one sail amidships. Gybing is easy enough, even with such a big sail. It takes me longer to reef and shake out a reef, because of the physical work needed. But even though the sail is so big, there's less work to do in construction and assembly than there was with the wingsails, and mid-ocean maintenance is going to be easier. I have no problems with helm balance and control, because I can move the sail across the mast, but this function brings with it more lines to operate, so that there are nearly as many running lines to deal with as on a two mast junk rig.
      
    Wingsails, individually, are easier to use than junk sails. No hauling parrels, just hoist it and lower it. A single wingsail  would still be my preferred choice for a smaller, inshore, performance-orientated boat. Two wingsails on one boat are probably easier to use than two junk sails on one boat.
     
  • 15 Aug 2012 20:46
    Reply # 1048012 on 833895
    A report on Tystie's sail, after about three and a half thousand miles of coastal and ocean sailing:

    I'm content now that this is a suitable sail-plan for ocean passages. I've used all the reefs, down to one panel and then bare poles in 40 knots. I never felt that the sail shape was a big mistake, and ought to be scrapped :-) The clew might be a little higher. I was dragging it through the bigger wave-tops occasionally. Partly, I made the sail too big (too greedy, as usual), but partly, it would be better with more forward rake to the mast, as Fantail has. David Thatcher was hoping to be able to rake Footprints' mast forward this winter.

    The sail has much more drive if I keep the yard as vertical as possible as I reef (because of the fan-induced camber), but once I get down to four or five reefs, I mustn't tighten up the yard hauling parrel, but let the yard go down to a lesser angle (which noticeably de-powers the sail). If I keep the yard peaked up, there is a high risk of getting the top of it the wrong side of the topping lifts. This can be corrected, by letting out the sheet, lowering the sail and hoisting it again, but it's better if I avoid having to do so. I've ended up by watching the peak of the yard as I reef, and making sure that there is enough slack in the yard hauling parrel to keep it aft of the topping lifts. I should really change the topping lifts so that the standing part is further forward, if I can figure out how.

    I really do have to pull the port side mast lift well aft, to avoid getting the forward ends of battens and yard the wrong side of it when I'm on port tack, I have four reefs or more, and the sail is very twisted. Both mast lifts should come down to a point about 1.5m aft of the tack. I'm having to use a span to haul the lift back to this point, which is not ideal, and the cloth triangle to which the lift is attached should really be moved aft. 

    The top three batten pockets all chafed in way of the mast. I think this is because at each one, the upper panel has less camber than the lower panel, and the pocket tends to rotate about the batten to equalise the forces acting on it. This results in the fender being too low. This is a downside of using Arne's simpler sail construction. Footprints' sail may not suffer in this way, because the pockets were attached at two points on the sail. The lower batten pockets, where there is equal camber in the panels, are OK so far.

    I wouldn't want more than the 6% camber we put in, for ocean passages. Premium windward ability is simply not at the top of the priority list. When the wind falls light, but there are still wind waves along with one or more swells from different directions, the sail panels empty and fill again with a big bang. This may be just the same as happens with a bermudan sail, but we junkies shouldn't have to put up with it. I have now formulated:
    "Tyler's Hypothesis - the amount of camber to be added to junk rig sail panels is inversely proportional to the distance offshore that it is intended to sail". 
    I think that 4% is the sensible limit, 6% is the not-so-sensible limit for offshore boats, and any more is strictly for inshore boats. If I made this sail again, I would start to decrease the camber sooner, that is, three panels at 6%, then decreasing towards the head, rather than four panels at 6%.

    My double sheeting, upper and lower, is still working out well. I spent such a lot of time on the passage from Opua to Tubuai with three reefs or more that I'm glad I had it. With four reefs or more, I could wish that the sheeting extended further up, to the next batten, but with three reefs or less, the twist is OK.

    I've changed the luff/throat hauling parrel so that it now starts at the batten 2 from the top, goes around the mast to a block on the yard, back around the mast to batten 3 from the top, around the mast to batten 4 from the top, and to the deck. I no longer have a second luff hauling parrel. I don't get the sail perfectly crease-free 100% of the time, but I get it good enough for me to look at without distressing myself.

    I'm glad I went for the carbon spars, despite the cost, time and hassle it took to make them - I didn't have any fears about broken spars on this passage, and the battens are very stiff now that they are fully cured.

  • 15 May 2012 10:35
    Reply # 920930 on 920850
    Deleted user
    David Tyler wrote:
    And also, I have to admit that there were fenders a-dangle when the photo was taken, and some nifty air-brushing was needed before it could be exposed to the public gaze.
    I tried that air brushing technique to clean the inside of our boat. Didn't work, is still a mess..
  • 15 May 2012 09:21
    Reply # 920881 on 833895
    It looks beautiful.  It is exactly what is required to enthuse young lycra clad newcomers to the new Oriental Full Bat Jet Turbo Fan Wing Flying Sail (rather than a load of old Junk crewed by elderlies in wooly pullies).  jds
  • 15 May 2012 07:56
    Reply # 920850 on 920814
    Kurt Jon Ulmer wrote:My Congratulations too, David.

    Your leading edge, from tack to peak, looks about twice as long as Tystie!

    It's another Tyler rig at the leading edge of junkdom. And like the past few, it'll sail many times as far as most. Fantail's, Footprints' and Tystie's sails are beautiful, too. There will be converts.

    Cheers,
    Kurt
    Thank you, Kurt.
    I have to admit that it's an optical illusion that she seems to be carrying such a cloud of sail. The beam-on photo is not so impressive - which is why I used the one that I did in my profile.
    And also, I have to admit that there were fenders a-dangle when the photo was taken, and some nifty air-brushing was needed before it could be exposed to the public gaze.
  • 15 May 2012 07:50
    Reply # 920847 on 919784
    Gary King wrote:Beautiful looking rig David. Do you think it can match the performance of your old wingsail?
    Thank you, Gary.
    Yes, the new single sail can match the old wingsails - in the plural. Going to a schooner or ketch rig inevitably brings with it a less good performance than a single masted rig, given sails of the same type (if by performance you mean speed to windward). By using wingsails, I was able to get the same performance to windward with a ketch rig as I could get with a purer form of junk rig on a single mast. I wasn't able to design a ketch junk rig that would have that performance, with greater simplicity, so a single junk sail it had to be.
    A single wingsail would be better than what I have now, but Tystie simply couldn't carry it. She hasn't enough stability and sail carrying power to use a single wingsail, which would be too heavy and too pressing for her. Anyway, such a sail would be entirely beyond me to design, build, rig and use.
  • 15 May 2012 06:35
    Reply # 920814 on 833895
    My Congratulations too, David.

    Your leading edge, from tack to peak, looks about twice as long as Tystie!

    It's another Tyler rig at the leading edge of junkdom. And like the past few, it'll sail many times as far as most. Fantail's, Footprints' and Tystie's sails are beautiful, too. There will be converts.

    Cheers,
    Kurt
  • 14 May 2012 17:10
    Reply # 919784 on 833895
    Deleted user
    Beautiful looking rig David. Do you think it can match the performance of your old wingsail?
       " ...there is nothing - absolutely nothing - half so much worth doing as simply messing about in junk-rigged boats" 
                                                               - the Chinese Water Rat

                                                              Site contents © the Junk Rig Association and/or individual authors

Powered by Wild Apricot Membership Software